mmoa_writes

Had a good time, actually. I must admit, that the more of these things I go to, the more I become aware of the fact that I am more than a little anti-social, a bit of a loner. But fair enough and no matter - this is my last year with all my chums so I'm determined to go to as many parties as I am invited to. University will be a much easier time of residing in the library/laboratories until the lights go out.

Parties with those crazy guys are brilliant though. I mean, where else could I have a fellow fansquee about certain philosophers/scientists whilst someone is vomiting in another room, and someone else is dancing crazily like a zombie with electrodes implanted in it's rotting limbs?



Following from an interesting conversation I was having with Poppy.

I used to admire agnosticism for all the wrong reasons. I found that, being the early relativist that I was, in the face of arguments for a/pan/theism/deism etc. it made sense to simply take the intelligent stance of saying one doesn't know and can therefore hold no belief that can be labelled as any of the above.

But then I cam across one strand of the agnostic argument that even if there were a God, one wouldn't be able to know that there was.

Hm.

Now, I can understand if one were to argue that at this present time, it may well be impossible to establish what sort of God, if any, there may be one. Maybe we don't have the right sort of instruments, maybe we haven't been able to make the right sort of mental conjectures. However, I don't quite understand that all the arguments for and against the existence [of any] God* can only lead to one taking the only logical, ie agnostic, approach - the works of the many philosophers (Spinoza principally) on the ontological question point to telling us, maybe not whether God exists or not, but what sort of God, if any, could possibly exist. The famous and infamous arguments that have raged for millenia on both sides, could be used to establish at least that much.

As for the existence of God itself...

Science, or at least, the study of the Universe, can help us there. This isn't so much to do with my general geekish over-appreciation of the scientific arts, but simply because that any deity in question, by it's very nature, is something that can be found. Whether the gods of the old pantheons, or the Jehovah so many of us are familiar with - all of them have properties which can be identified by scientific means.

Mainly, essentially, because they exist. If anything exists, then it can be found by means of specific investigation. It isn't a question of the old excuse that the gods go by rules of their own - those rules will be as much a part of nature, albeit a part that we as humans cannot partake of (not that that is anything new: I'm still a little peeved that I can't see using UV light...), as the rules that govern the mundane. We can still find them, is my point.

But then, I'm biased. We 'pantheist atheists' think we're so smart...


*I may as well specify, that by 'God' I do of course refer to each and every deity and supernatural force that has ever, or could ever exist. It's the Hellenist in me.



Sometimes I feel a little bitter being bound by the customs and traditions of the Igbo, as much as I rejoice in them. I am, of course, feeling a little angry anyway, so that no doubt has something to do with it... but I hate the way my father insists on the standards of a much twisted and perverted culture, from us his children, whereas he himself (as the all knowing patriarch) seems to be exempt from them.

But then, he is generally an appallingly rude man, and I am furious with him and with that, just about everything he represents.

*sighs*

My Godmother came round for lunch today which was nice. My parents spoiled the occasion, as ever, but ah well. It was good to see her here - she is the greatest.